adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Media

SBJ Media: Why this weekend is so important to Disney, Charter

Published

 on

Here’s a special Labor Day column on how Charter’s public dispute with Disney/ESPN could affect the sports business.

Charter’s decision to drop Disney and ESPN channels from its Spectrum cable systems was years in the making. Four years, in fact. That’s when the country’s second largest cable operator and the country’s most powerful programming network completed a carriage negotiation with little fanfare — no public bickering, no channel blackouts.

But behind the scenes during those negotiations in 2019, talks were much more contentious than originally believed, several sources said. At that time, Charter execs came close to deciding to leave the video business altogether. That was four years and around 30 million cable video subscribers ago. The cord-cutting trend, combined with higher ever-increasing affiliate rates for TV networks, makes it easier for Charter to make a move away from video today.

It’s likely that these two will reach an agreement over the next few days or weeks. The two sides still are talking. I’m told Charter President and CEO Chris Winfrey and Disney CEO Bob Iger have been in contact over the weekend.

Regardless of what a possible deal looks like, the die is cast. Charter has shown the stomach for dropping these channels is stronger than ever. The rate that Charter pays for TV networks — especially sports — has become so expensive that the cable operator’s margins are razor thin. Broadband and wireless are a much better business, with much higher margins, for cable operators.

You can read reams of stories about what happened last Thursday when all of Disney’s channels went dark on Charter’s systems. Ben Mullin and Joe Flint have the best write-ups that I’ve seen.

But the main point that should send shivers throughout the sports business is that Charter plans to exit the video business at some point over the next few years. For most of my cable industry sources, that point appears obvious.

Cable operators have made these arguments so often for the past several decades that they have always rung hollow. Whenever they’ve had these disputes, cable operators always found enough money to do the deals. Programmers have held all the leverage since the beginning of cable. It was no surprise that Disney/ESPN’s current deal with Charter ended Aug. 31. College football’s opening weekend, followed by the start of the NFL, historically would have given Disney/ESPN a lot of leverage with angry fans threatening to cancel their service.

But that leverage appears to have switched in this dispute. Nobody has seen hard numbers, but I’d be willing to bet that Charter was inundated with calls to cancel their service over the weekend. ESPN is such a powerful force because it has games and events that people want to see.

The thing that’s different about this dispute, though, is that Charter has a plan. It already has been referring upset subscribers to FuboTV for video. Why would it send its subscribers to a competing video service? Because Charter wants to make sure that the subscribers who ditch video keep their broadband and wireless packages with Charter.

MoffettNathanson reported last week that Charter is “preparing a one-touch QR code that would not only create a new YouTube TV or Fubo subscription but would also downgrade from a Spectrum video bundle with a single click. To minimize any impact on broadband subscribership, they’ll lean more heavily than ever into their Spectrum One wireless/broadband bundle. Video is already being de-emphasized.”

Despite steady negotiations over the weekend, sources said that Charter and Disney are no closer to a deal than they were last week. Disney wants to wait to see how much pain Charter is willing to take from angry sports fans ditching their video packages. Charter’s plan to refer those angry subscribers to other video outlets suggests that the cable operator is prepared to wait it out, as well.

If Charter has more leverage, what should Disney do?

This is the main question that I asked my best sources. They mainly agreed that Disney needs figure out if Charter really is as dug into its position as it appears to be. If Disney determines that Charter really is serious about moving on without video, it needs to find a middle ground that leads to a deal and keeps revenue from the cable bundle flowing for at least the next five years.

Why not just cut the best deal to keep channels up on Charter?

This is not just a Charter issue for Disney; it’s an industry one. All cable network contracts with the biggest cable operators carry clauses known as MFNs (Most Favored Nations). If Charter negotiates better terms than Comcast, for example, Comcast can automatically take Charter’s terms. Whatever deal Disney works out with Charter will be applied to the biggest distributors. That means that the biggest distributors will benefit if Disney bows to Charter’s demands.

Why does this Charter deal matter so much?

In general, cable channels make most of their money from ad sales and sponsorships. That’s not true with sports channels, especially ESPN, which has the biggest license fee among all cable channels, north of $10 per subscriber per month. Affiliate fees make up a big majority of ESPN’s revenue. Any drop in affiliate fees — or even stagnation — will hamper ESPN as it goes into the market to negotiate rights deals with leagues and conferences. And remember, Charter has 14.7 million subscribers, including systems in some of the country’s biggest markets: N.Y., L.A., Dallas.

What’s the worst-case scenario?

If Charter gets out of the video business, and if other cable operators follow suit, media rights could be reset lower, which would have broad implications on team values and player salaries. Leagues and teams still would have media rights deals. But they wouldn’t be the same as they’ve seen over the past three decades, when the cable model benefitted sports leagues and teams more than anything else.

 

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Trump could cash out his DJT stock within weeks. Here’s what happens if he sells

Published

 on

Former President Donald Trump is on the brink of a significant financial decision that could have far-reaching implications for both his personal wealth and the future of his fledgling social media company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). As the lockup period on his shares in TMTG, which owns Truth Social, nears its end, Trump could soon be free to sell his substantial stake in the company. However, the potential payday, which makes up a large portion of his net worth, comes with considerable risks for Trump and his supporters.

Trump’s stake in TMTG comprises nearly 59% of the company, amounting to 114,750,000 shares. As of now, this holding is valued at approximately $2.6 billion. These shares are currently under a lockup agreement, a common feature of initial public offerings (IPOs), designed to prevent company insiders from immediately selling their shares and potentially destabilizing the stock. The lockup, which began after TMTG’s merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), is set to expire on September 25, though it could end earlier if certain conditions are met.

Should Trump decide to sell his shares after the lockup expires, the market could respond in unpredictable ways. The sale of a substantial number of shares by a major stakeholder like Trump could flood the market, potentially driving down the stock price. Daniel Bradley, a finance professor at the University of South Florida, suggests that the market might react negatively to such a large sale, particularly if there aren’t enough buyers to absorb the supply. This could lead to a sharp decline in the stock’s value, impacting both Trump’s personal wealth and the company’s market standing.

Moreover, Trump’s involvement in Truth Social has been a key driver of investor interest. The platform, marketed as a free speech alternative to mainstream social media, has attracted a loyal user base largely due to Trump’s presence. If Trump were to sell his stake, it might signal a lack of confidence in the company, potentially shaking investor confidence and further depressing the stock price.

Trump’s decision is also influenced by his ongoing legal battles, which have already cost him over $100 million in legal fees. Selling his shares could provide a significant financial boost, helping him cover these mounting expenses. However, this move could also have political ramifications, especially as he continues his bid for the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential race.

Trump Media’s success is closely tied to Trump’s political fortunes. The company’s stock has shown volatility in response to developments in the presidential race, with Trump’s chances of winning having a direct impact on the stock’s value. If Trump sells his stake, it could be interpreted as a lack of confidence in his own political future, potentially undermining both his campaign and the company’s prospects.

Truth Social, the flagship product of TMTG, has faced challenges in generating traffic and advertising revenue, especially compared to established social media giants like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook. Despite this, the company’s valuation has remained high, fueled by investor speculation on Trump’s political future. If Trump remains in the race and manages to secure the presidency, the value of his shares could increase. Conversely, any missteps on the campaign trail could have the opposite effect, further destabilizing the stock.

As the lockup period comes to an end, Trump faces a critical decision that could shape the future of both his personal finances and Truth Social. Whether he chooses to hold onto his shares or cash out, the outcome will likely have significant consequences for the company, its investors, and Trump’s political aspirations.

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Arizona man accused of social media threats to Trump is arrested

Published

 on

Cochise County, AZ — Law enforcement officials in Arizona have apprehended Ronald Lee Syvrud, a 66-year-old resident of Cochise County, after a manhunt was launched following alleged death threats he made against former President Donald Trump. The threats reportedly surfaced in social media posts over the past two weeks, as Trump visited the US-Mexico border in Cochise County on Thursday.

Syvrud, who hails from Benson, Arizona, located about 50 miles southeast of Tucson, was captured by the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office on Thursday afternoon. The Sheriff’s Office confirmed his arrest, stating, “This subject has been taken into custody without incident.”

In addition to the alleged threats against Trump, Syvrud is wanted for multiple offences, including failure to register as a sex offender. He also faces several warrants in both Wisconsin and Arizona, including charges for driving under the influence and a felony hit-and-run.

The timing of the arrest coincided with Trump’s visit to Cochise County, where he toured the US-Mexico border. During his visit, Trump addressed the ongoing border issues and criticized his political rival, Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, for what he described as lax immigration policies. When asked by reporters about the ongoing manhunt for Syvrud, Trump responded, “No, I have not heard that, but I am not that surprised and the reason is because I want to do things that are very bad for the bad guys.”

This incident marks the latest in a series of threats against political figures during the current election cycle. Just earlier this month, a 66-year-old Virginia man was arrested on suspicion of making death threats against Vice President Kamala Harris and other public officials.

Continue Reading

Media

Trump Media & Technology Group Faces Declining Stock Amid Financial Struggles and Increased Competition

Published

 on

Tech News in Canada

Trump Media & Technology Group’s stock has taken a significant hit, dropping more than 11% this week following a disappointing earnings report and the return of former U.S. President Donald Trump to the rival social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. This decline is part of a broader downward trend for the parent company of Truth Social, with the stock plummeting nearly 43% since mid-July. Despite the sharp decline, some investors remain unfazed, expressing continued optimism for the company’s financial future or standing by their investment as a show of political support for Trump.

One such investor, Todd Schlanger, an interior designer from West Palm Beach, explained his commitment to the stock, stating, “I’m a Republican, so I supported him. When I found out about the stock, I got involved because I support the company and believe in free speech.” Schlanger, who owns around 1,000 shares, is a regular user of Truth Social and is excited about the company’s future, particularly its plans to expand its streaming services. He believes Truth Social has the potential to be as strong as Facebook or X, despite the stock’s recent struggles.

However, Truth Social’s stock performance is deeply tied to Trump’s political influence and the company’s ability to generate sustainable revenue, which has proven challenging. An earnings report released last Friday showed the company lost over $16 million in the three-month period ending in June. Revenue dropped by 30%, down to approximately $836,000 compared to $1.2 million during the same period last year.

In response to the earnings report, Truth Social CEO Devin Nunes emphasized the company’s strong cash position, highlighting $344 million in cash reserves and no debt. He also reiterated the company’s commitment to free speech, stating, “From the beginning, it was our intention to make Truth Social an impenetrable beachhead of free speech, and by taking extraordinary steps to minimize our reliance on Big Tech, that is exactly what we are doing.”

Despite these assurances, investors reacted negatively to the quarterly report, leading to a steep drop in stock price. The situation was further complicated by Trump’s return to X, where he posted for the first time in a year. Trump’s exclusivity agreement with Trump Media & Technology Group mandates that he posts personal content first on Truth Social. However, he is allowed to make politically related posts on other social media platforms, which he did earlier this week, potentially drawing users away from Truth Social.

For investors like Teri Lynn Roberson, who purchased shares near the company’s peak after it went public in March, the decline in stock value has been disheartening. However, Roberson remains unbothered by the poor performance, saying her investment was more about supporting Trump than making money. “I’m way at a loss, but I am OK with that. I am just watching it for fun,” Roberson said, adding that she sees Trump’s return to X as a positive move that could expand his reach beyond Truth Social’s “echo chamber.”

The stock’s performance holds significant financial implications for Trump himself, as he owns a 65% stake in Trump Media & Technology Group. According to Fortune, this stake represents a substantial portion of his net worth, which could be vulnerable if the company continues to struggle financially.

Analysts have described Truth Social as a “meme stock,” similar to companies like GameStop and AMC that saw their stock prices driven by ideological investments rather than business fundamentals. Tyler Richey, an analyst at Sevens Report Research, noted that the stock has ebbed and flowed based on sentiment toward Trump. He pointed out that the recent decline coincided with the rise of U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential nominee, which may have dampened perceptions of Trump’s 2024 election prospects.

Jay Ritter, a finance professor at the University of Florida, offered a grim long-term outlook for Truth Social, suggesting that the stock would likely remain volatile, but with an overall downward trend. “What’s lacking for the true believer in the company story is, ‘OK, where is the business strategy that will be generating revenue?'” Ritter said, highlighting the company’s struggle to produce a sustainable business model.

Still, for some investors, like Michael Rogers, a masonry company owner in North Carolina, their support for Trump Media & Technology Group is unwavering. Rogers, who owns over 10,000 shares, said he invested in the company both as a show of support for Trump and because of his belief in the company’s financial future. Despite concerns about the company’s revenue challenges, Rogers expressed confidence in the business, stating, “I’m in it for the long haul.”

Not all investors are as confident. Mitchell Standley, who made a significant return on his investment earlier this year by capitalizing on the hype surrounding Trump Media’s planned merger with Digital World Acquisition Corporation, has since moved on. “It was basically just a pump and dump,” Standley told ABC News. “I knew that once they merged, all of his supporters were going to dump a bunch of money into it and buy it up.” Now, Standley is staying away from the company, citing the lack of business fundamentals as the reason for his exit.

Truth Social’s future remains uncertain as it continues to struggle with financial losses and faces stiff competition from established social media platforms. While its user base and investor sentiment are bolstered by Trump’s political following, the company’s long-term viability will depend on its ability to create a sustainable revenue stream and maintain relevance in a crowded digital landscape.

As the company seeks to stabilize, the question remains whether its appeal to Trump’s supporters can translate into financial success or whether it will remain a volatile stock driven more by ideology than business fundamentals.

Continue Reading

Trending